Saturday, May 28, 2011

Thank God, or Lady Luck, or whomever you like: yesterday reports went out of a man arrested BEFORE he murdered a law-abiding doctor, instead of after.

The quick details: Ralph Lang, 63, drove up to Madison with a gun with the clear intention of murdering at least one abortion-providing doctor, and possibly other nurses and employees. His handgun discharged while he was at a motel, and the police were called. Upon hearing his plans, he was taken into custody.

I’m so thankful that Lang’s gun went off in his motel room. I’m also thankful he wasn’t “100 percent in sync with God” when he was in Madison last week and didn’t kill anyone. I’m thankful that he didn’t get to go to the clinic, “line [the employees] up all in a row, get a machine gun, and mow them all down” as he said he wished he could.

The other information you should know: Ralph Lang is not a “lone wolf” or a “fringe member” of the antichoice “pro-life” community. He is a sidewalk counselor (read: harasser) and was arrested previously in 2007 outside of a Planned Parenthood. He was part of a Catholic prayer vigil (read: more sidewalk harassment) in 2006, at which time he said, “it’s nice to be a part of a movement like this.” I’m sure as we learn more details we will see more connections between Ralph Lang and well known anti-choice groups.

Of course, Lang’s language is gleamed from common anti-choice propaganda. He planned “to lay out abortionists because they are killing babies”- words used by many so-called peaceful anti-choicers. These ‘peaceful’ antis claim they don’t actually want anyone hurt, yet continue to repeat these phrases until they’ve convinced someone- like Ralph Lang, or Scott Roeder- to do the dirty work for them. When they call doctors murderers over and over and over again, they set the kindling and strike the match for others to take those words and follow through with them.

It’s long past time for antichoicers to stop their violent rhetoric. It was long past time two years ago, when Dr. George Tiller was murdered in his church. It was long past time in 1998 when Dr. Slepian and a security guard were killed, in 1994 when two clinic receptionists, Dr Britton and an escort were killed, in 1993 when Dr. Gunn was murdered. It’s been nearly 20 years of murders- when will anti-choicers actually take a prolife stance and stop the violence?

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

If you were an employee at a reproductive health care clinic and someone came in and asked you about obtaining abortions for women being sex trafficked, what would you do?

Here’s what I would do: Lie. Lie, lie, and then lie some more.

Why?

There’s one thing for certain: If you tell the person “No, we will not give these women healthcare” then you will never be able to find them. You will never be able to help them get out of being trafficked, help them get their lives back.

And if you tell this person “That’s against the law! I’m calling the cops!”- then you might just lose your life.

Everyone knows that in a bank robbery, you’re supposed to do whatever the bank robber tells you. The bank robber doesn’t care about the law or your life, (s)he just wants the money and to escape. Doing anything to prevent that puts you in danger.

The same thing applies with someone who trafficks people. This person abuses women for their bodies- (s)he’s not interested in your morals or the law.

The BEST way to ensure those trafficked girls are found? Lie. Tell the person that you can provide the girls with healthcare services, that you wont tell anyone, that its all perfectly legal. And then after the meeting, go tell your superiors and the law enforcement. When the person comes again with the women (s)he is trafficking, law enforcement can be there to arrest the person. The girls can be provided with healthcare (which they will need), counseling, a place to stay, etc. Dare I sound too forward- they can be rescued.

Of course, if the person coming in to ask about healthcare for sex trafficked women is really just a fake undercover anti-choicer, this type of situation may lead the employee and the clinic to look bad.

But personally, I’d rather look bad and rescue women from sex trafficking than look good and never have the chance to save them. Being a reproductive justice activist isn’t about looking good, it’s about helping other people.

Friday, January 21, 2011

Today is Blog for Choice day. While there is a question that has been put out by prochoicers for us to answer, the antis have come up with what they consider a clever "come back" in which they ask "What is choice?"

Well, why not answer that straight off the bat?

Definitions of choice on the Web:

* the act of choosing or selecting; "your choice of colors was unfortunate"; "you can take your pick"

When I say I support choice, that means I support each individual woman's ability to make a decision (after being informed of risks/benefits) about how she is going to responsibly care for her pregnancy.

When she first becomes pregnant, that usually means she is choosing between having an abortion and giving birth. If she chooses to have an abortion, then she gets to make a decision whether she wants to have a medical or a surgical abortion. She gets to choose the safest clinic setting for her (I would like to see there be no Hyde amendment forcing women into clinics like Gosnell's) and has someone she trusts to provide whatever she needs (driving, food, hugs, whatever).

If she chooses to carry to term, then she gets to make a decision about whether she wants to use a midwife or an OB/GYN. She chooses between a homebirth, hospital birth and birthing center. She chooses whether to have an all natural birth, whether to use an epidural, whether to be induced.

Towards the end of the pregnancy, if she has chosen to carry to term, she must make a decision about whether she wants to keep the infant after birth or give it up for adoption. If she chooses adoption, she gets to decide if she wants an open or closed adoption. She gets to choose which adoptive family her child will become a part of. If she chooses to raise the infant herself, she gets to choose her parenting style: will she breastfeed, co-sleep or babywear?

Of course, there are also choices to be made before a woman becomes pregnant. She has to choose what type of contraceptive (and I include abstinence among them) she wants to use, for instance.

As you can see, choice is about so many different things. But in the end, it really all comes down to supporting one thing: Trusting women to make the best decisions for themselves and their families when they're fully informed of all the risks and benefits associated with the possible options. This is Choice.

Monday, January 17, 2011

Anti-choicers are always trying to trick pro-choicers into saying something that makes them look bad. One such example is when anti-choicers bring up sex-selective abortions. “If you support girls/women, how can you support sex-selective abortions!?!” they ask (Don’t get me started on the fact that you cannot abort a woman. Physically impossible). They don’t ask these questions because they’re interested in reducing sex-selective abortions; they’re just interested in making pro-choicers seem coldhearted.

But what if they did want to reduce sex-selective abortions? How would they go about doing that? Pro-choice, of course, already has the answer: Feminism.

Sex-selective abortions happen because the pregnant woman’s culture favors one sex over the other- usually, male over female*. For instance, in China, families will abort a female fetus or abandon a female infant because they want a male infant. Males stay with the family, and carry on the family name while females are married off to another family and basically lose their birth family. For this reason, males are valued higher than females. And for this reason, sex- selective abortions occur.

This is where feminism comes in. Feminism says that both sexes are equal in value and worth. Men and women, with their differences and similarities, are not better than one another but standing on an equal plane. If feminist ideas were to become culturally normal, sex-selective abortions would not occur. Families would value and appreciate a fetus they wanted regardless of its sex. Not only would this apply to fetuses, but to children as well; families would be just as glad to have a daughter as they would be to have a son.

On top of that, feminism would give the opinions of women equal weight to men. Who knows- maybe women in China and other countries don’t want to have sex selective abortions, but their culture pressures them into that decision? Supporting feminism would support women who choose to not have a sex-selective abortion.

So next time an anti-choicer asks you what you think of sex-selective abortions, ask them right back: “What are you doing to prevent sex-selection?” Then ask them to support feminism, so that males and females will be valued equally.

* I understand there are other situations involved such as intersex –this post is a simple overview. I welcome others to write about the issues of feminism, sex-selection and intersex.

About Me

I'm a Pro-choice Christian who wants to reduce the need for elective abortions through comprehensive sex education, reformed adoption and better support for pregnant women!
Have a question? Ask me here: http://www.formspring.me/KushielsMoon